Dan Holt's List: Web 2.0

• In time, many of the Internet activities we now associate with the 2D Web will migrate to the 3D spaces of the Metaverse. This does not mean all or even most of our web pages will become 3D, or even that we'll typically read web content in 3D spaces. It means that as new tools develop, we’ll be able to intelligently mesh 2D and 3D to gain the unique advantages of each, in the appropriate context.

• WL has some specific features that are of particular interest and that are not possible to my knowledge in SL. Application sharing is one. Being able to share any application that runs in X11 has profound implications for distance learning. and social computing. Using VNC, a MS-Windows desktop and associated applications can also be shared. Collaborative whiteboards, videos, PDFs... So much is possible.
  
  As a mini use case, imaging opening a shared browser in WL. This provides for novel and interesting distance learning configurations. A Blackboard or Sakai discussion board could be opened and used as a point of departure for virtual discussion. A PowerPoint slideshow could be presented at a distance and learners could have the opportunity to ask questions and receive feedback in real-time. Simulations could be incorporated for experiential learning. Three dimensional, collaborative concept mapping could also be incorporated. Again, so much is possible. This makes WL a truly exciting learning platform.

• My generation was much more about "going online" and it being this separate universe, in many ways a totally separate social world with social rules and scripts and what not. But for a lot of young people, it is a fluid environment that moves between their offline and online worlds. The technology doesn't act as a separator.
• replicating their networks and their community online, using all the online tools -- IM, email, blogs, Myspace, that kind of thing -- to talk to the people that they already have networks formulated around.
• marginalized and ostracized kids who are actually actively seeking out a community of peers online because they don't have one offline.
• assumption from the earlier days of the Internet was that this latter [behavior] is all that the kids were doing, and actually that's become the less common practice
• key practice is that you have to write yourself into being.
• To a certain degree we do this offline as well, whereby you have a body that you're working with that you then accessorize to hell. Online you don't have a body, you don't have a presence, you don't have anything that sort of marks your existence.
• four functions that are sort of the key architecture of online publics and key structures of mediated environments that are generally not part of the offline world. And those are persistence, searchability, replicability, and invisible audiences.
• Myth No. 1 is that everybody is on there to meet people, and everyone is on there to engage in social networking.
• Myth No. 2 is that kids are in grave danger just because of participation.

7 more annotations...

• Though a body of sorts comes into play with 3D immersive environments like SL. - Dan Holt on 2008-12-03

• at least in my own usage experiences, the Tweets and the Facebook status updates are very different. Facebook is sort of the place where I share details of my life with friends and other acquaintances - people that I’ve invited and accepted into my world. Twitter is the place where I sort of just broadcast out to anyone who cares to listen.